Latest news with #MarkGaber
Yahoo
16-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Appeals ruling curtails voting rights cases in Iowa, six other states
A federal appeals court has blocked one of the main remaining means for civil rights activists to seek enforcement of a landmark voting rights law's protections against racial discrimination in Iowa and six other mostly Midwestern states. The 2-1 panel of the St. Louis-based Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday, May 14, that private plaintiffs cannot use an 1871 civil rights law as a means to enforce protections enshrined in the Voting Rights Act. The court reached that conclusion as it reversed a judge's ruling finding that Republican-led North Dakota's 2021 legislative redistricting plan unlawfully diluted the voting power of Native Americans. More: Iowa Supreme Court overturns ruling, forbids non-English voting documents, such as ballots Lawyers for the plaintiffs said the ruling, if allowed to stand, would weaken voters' ability to challenge unfair voting maps in Iowa, Arkansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska and South Dakota, as well. Those states are within the jurisdiction of the Eighth Circuit, which already had severely restricted the ability of their voters to file lawsuits challenging voting maps when it held in 2023 that only the government and not private plaintiffs can pursue cases enforcing Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Two members of the U.S. Supreme Court's 6-3 conservative majority have suggested in past cases that private plaintiffs do not have a right to pursue such cases, even though the vast majority of Voting Rights Act lawsuits for decades have been filed by private parties, not the U.S. Department of Justice. Against that backdrop, civil rights advocates last year opted against appealing the 2023 ruling to the Supreme Court, citing the availability of an alternative mechanism for plaintiffs to still pursue voting rights cases. That avenue was Section 1983, an 1871 law enacted in the post-Civil War Reconstruction Era, which gives people the power to sue in federal court when state officials violate their constitutional or statutory rights. A federal judge in North Dakota relied on it when he sided with the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians, the Spirit Lake Tribe and three voters in holding that the state's 2021 redistricting plan unlawfully diluted Native Americans' voting strength. More: After flagging 2,000+ ballots, Iowa secretary of state says 35 noncitizens voted in 2024 But U.S. Circuit Judge Raymond Gruender, writing for the majority in Wednesday's decision, said Congress did not speak with a "clear voice" to unambiguously confer an individual right in the Voting Rights Act's Section 2 that could be enforced through Section 1983. Mark Gaber, a lawyer for the plaintiffs at the Campaign Legal Center, said in a statement that "this radical decision will hobble the most important anti-discrimination voting law." His group did not say whether it would pursue further appeals, but the plaintiffs could either ask the full 8th Circuit to rehear the case or ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review it. Republican presidents appointed all three judges who heard the appeal, including U.S. Circuit Judge Steve Colloton, the lone dissenter. He said the majority was wrong and that, under its logic, the more than 400 lawsuits that have resulted in judicial decisions brought under the Voting Rights Act's Section 2 since 1982 should have been dismissed. This article originally appeared on Des Moines Register: Seven-state ruling curtails voting rights cases in Iowa
Epoch Times
15-05-2025
- Politics
- Epoch Times
US Appeals Court Rules Against North Dakota Tribes in Voting Rights Act Lawsuit
A federal appeals court on Wednesday ruled that two tribal groups may not bring a voting discrimination lawsuit against the state of North Dakota under a civil rights law—a decision that is set to have implications in seven Midwest states. In a 2–1 decision, the St. Louis-based Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that private plaintiffs cannot use The decision was in response to a The ruling further weakens voters' power in Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota, according to the Campaign Legal Center, which represented the tribes in the legal challenge. 'This decision severely undermines the Voting Rights Act and is contrary to both the intent of Congress in enacting the law and to decades of Supreme Court precedent affirming voters' power to enforce the law in court,' Mark Gaber, senior director for redistricting at the center, said in a 'If left intact, this radical decision will hobble the most important anti-discrimination voting law by leaving its enforcement to government attorneys whose ranks are currently being depleted. Campaign Legal Center will continue to fight to uphold the VRA and ensure fair maps.' Related Stories 5/14/2025 5/14/2025 Gaber did not state whether the center would pursue further appeals, but the plaintiffs could ask the full Eighth Circuit to rehear the case or take it to the Supreme Court. The vast majority of Voting Rights Act cases are filed by private parties. The latest ruling comes after the same appellate court restricted the ability of voters to file lawsuits challenging voting maps when it ruled in 2023 that only the Department of Justice—and not private plaintiffs—can pursue cases enforcing Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. That Federal Judge Sides With Tribes in Redistricting Lawsuit Civil rights advocates last year opted against appealing the 2023 ruling to the Supreme Court, That avenue was A federal judge in North Dakota relied on the same federal civil rights law in 2023 when he sided with the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians, the Spirit Lake Tribe, and voters in holding that the state's 2021 redistricting plan unlawfully diluted the Native American tribes' voting power. However, Circuit Judge Raymond Gruender, writing for the majority in Wednesday's decision, said Congress did not speak with a 'clear voice' that 'manifests an unambiguous intent to confer individual rights' in Voting Rights Act's Section 2 that could be enforced through Section 1983. Gruender, in finding that the plaintiffs do not have a cause of action, added that the district court erred in its 2021 decision. He vacated the district court's judgment and dismissed the tribes' lawsuit. In a lone dissenting opinion, Chief Circuit Judge Steven Colloton wrote that the majority was wrong, pointing to the lengthy history of more than 400 lawsuits that have resulted in judicial decisions brought under the Voting Rights Act's Section 2 since 1982. He noted that Section 1983 says individuals may sue if they are subjected to 'the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.' 'The reference to 'and laws' encompasses any law of the United States,' Colloton wrote. The Epoch Times contacted the North Dakota Secretary of State's Office for comment but did not receive a response by publication time.
Winnipeg Free Press
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Winnipeg Free Press
Ruling in North Dakota case erases path for people in 7 states to sue under the Voting Rights Act
BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) — A federal appeals court that already has said private individuals and groups cannot sue under a key part of the federal Voting Rights Act went even further Wednesday toward blocking lawsuits over alleged racial bias in voting in seven Midwest states. But its decisions may not be the last word, because another appeals court has ruled differently, and the U.S. Supreme Court would have to resolve the conflict. The latest ruling reversed a legal victory for two tribal nations in North Dakota that challenged a legislative redistricting plan. The ruling shuts off a route to Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act through a federal civil rights law known as Section 1983, which allows people to sue state officials to vindicate their federal or constitutional rights, said Jonathan Topaz, staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union Voting Rights Project. Section 1983 provides a legal vehicle to bring a lawsuit, he said. Private individuals in past decades brought lawsuits under Section 2, but a 2023 8th Circuit ruling in an Arkansas redistricting case held that Section 2 doesn't allow for private claims. That ruling and Wednesday's only apply to the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which encompasses Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota. 'These decisions together at the moment mean that no one can sue under the Voting Rights Act in the seven states that comprise the 8th Circuit, other than the U.S. Attorney General,' said Mark Gaber, senior director for redistricting at Campaign Legal Center and an attorney for the Spirit Lake Tribe and Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians. The majority opinion Wednesday said that in order to use Section 1983 to file lawsuits over voting rights, including how redistricting affects them, a private person or group must 'unambiguously' have the right to sue under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Appeals Judge Raymond Gruender, appointed by George W. Bush and writing for the majority, said that while the tribes 'are within the general zone of interest' of the Voting Rights Act, it is 'without the statute having unambiguously conferred an individual right.' In a dissent, Circuit Chief Judge Steven Colloton, another Bush appointee, said Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act does confer a right to sue and he would have upheld the tribes' legal victory on redistricting. Wednesday's decision and the Arkansas ruling 'create circuit splits' on the Section 2 and Section 1983 issues because the 8th Circuit is the only court to rule in such a way in both instances, Gaber said. The tribes and their attorneys are discussing and considering appeal options, he said. The 2-1 ruling is a reversal for the two tribes, who had successfully challenged North Dakota's 2021 redistricting map, alleging it dilutes their voting strength. The tribes wanted to share a single legislative district, electing a state senator and two House members, making it more likely that all three would be Native American. The 2021 plan split them into different districts. The court-ordered plan gave the tribes what they wanted. Spirit Lake, Turtle Mountain and several tribal citizens alleged that the 2021 map drew the lines so that while Turtle Mountain members still could elect a House member, the Spirit Lake members could not. In late 2023, U.S. District Court Chief Judge Peter Welte ruled after a trial, saying the Legislature's map 'prevents Native American voters from having an equal opportunity to elect candidates of their choice' in violation of the Voting Rights Act's Section 2. In early 2024, the judge ordered a new map into place with a joint district for the two tribes. Their reservations near the Canadian border and in northeastern North Dakota, respectively, are about 60 miles (97 kilometers) apart. Later that year, voters elected three Native Americans, all Democrats, to the district's seats. Republican Senate Majority Leader David Hogue said the 2021 boundaries the Legislature drew 'will be the boundaries.' Somehow officials will have to address the seats of incumbents affected by the boundaries at question, potentially by special election, he said. Winnipeg Jets Game Days On Winnipeg Jets game days, hockey writers Mike McIntyre and Ken Wiebe send news, notes and quotes from the morning skate, as well as injury updates and lineup decisions. Arrives a few hours prior to puck drop. 'I think the Legislature was very comfortable with the fairness of the boundaries that they drew in 2021, and I think we should endeavor to uphold those boundaries,' Hogue said. In a statement, Secretary of State Michael Howe's office said it will now work with the 2021 map in place for the 2026 elections, 'pending any further actions.' Republicans control North Dakota's Legislature by 83-11 in the House and 42-5 in the Senate. The state's biennial legislative session concluded earlier this month. ___ Associated Press reporter John Hanna contributed from Topeka, Kansas.
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Ruling in North Dakota case erases path for people in 7 states to sue under the Voting Rights Act
BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) — A federal appeals court that already has said private individuals and groups cannot sue under a key part of the federal Voting Rights Act went even further Wednesday toward blocking lawsuits over alleged racial bias in voting in seven Midwest states. But its decisions may not be the last word, because another appeals court has ruled differently, and the U.S. Supreme Court would have to resolve the conflict. The latest ruling reversed a legal victory for two tribal nations in North Dakota that challenged a legislative redistricting plan. The ruling shuts off a route to Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act through a federal civil rights law known as Section 1983, which allows people to sue state officials to vindicate their federal or constitutional rights, said Jonathan Topaz, staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union Voting Rights Project. Section 1983 provides a legal vehicle to bring a lawsuit, he said. Private individuals in past decades brought lawsuits under Section 2, but a 2023 8th Circuit ruling in an Arkansas redistricting case held that Section 2 doesn't allow for private claims. That ruling and Wednesday's only apply to the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which encompasses Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota. 'These decisions together at the moment mean that no one can sue under the Voting Rights Act in the seven states that comprise the 8th Circuit, other than the U.S. Attorney General,' said Mark Gaber, senior director for redistricting at Campaign Legal Center and an attorney for the Spirit Lake Tribe and Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians. The majority opinion Wednesday said that in order to use Section 1983 to file lawsuits over voting rights, including how redistricting affects them, a private person or group must 'unambiguously' have the right to sue under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Appeals Judge Raymond Gruender, appointed by George W. Bush and writing for the majority, said that while the tribes 'are within the general zone of interest' of the Voting Rights Act, it is 'without the statute having unambiguously conferred an individual right.' In a dissent, Circuit Chief Judge Steven Colloton, another Bush appointee, said Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act does confer a right to sue and he would have upheld the tribes' legal victory on redistricting. Wednesday's decision and the Arkansas ruling "create circuit splits' on the Section 2 and Section 1983 issues because the 8th Circuit is the only court to rule in such a way in both instances, Gaber said. The tribes and their attorneys are discussing and considering appeal options, he said. The 2-1 ruling is a reversal for the two tribes, who had successfully challenged North Dakota's 2021 redistricting map, alleging it dilutes their voting strength. The tribes wanted to share a single legislative district, electing a state senator and two House members, making it more likely that all three would be Native American. The 2021 plan split them into different districts. The court-ordered plan gave the tribes what they wanted. Spirit Lake, Turtle Mountain and several tribal citizens alleged that the 2021 map drew the lines so that while Turtle Mountain members still could elect a House member, the Spirit Lake members could not. In late 2023, U.S. District Court Chief Judge Peter Welte ruled after a trial, saying the Legislature's map 'prevents Native American voters from having an equal opportunity to elect candidates of their choice" in violation of the Voting Rights Act's Section 2. In early 2024, the judge ordered a new map into place with a joint district for the two tribes. Their reservations near the Canadian border and in northeastern North Dakota, respectively, are about 60 miles (97 kilometers) apart. Later that year, voters elected three Native Americans, all Democrats, to the district's seats. Republican Senate Majority Leader David Hogue said the 2021 boundaries the Legislature drew 'will be the boundaries." Somehow officials will have to address the seats of incumbents affected by the boundaries at question, potentially by special election, he said. 'I think the Legislature was very comfortable with the fairness of the boundaries that they drew in 2021, and I think we should endeavor to uphold those boundaries,' Hogue said. In a statement, Secretary of State Michael Howe's office said it will now work with the 2021 map in place for the 2026 elections, 'pending any further actions.' Republicans control North Dakota's Legislature by 83-11 in the House and 42-5 in the Senate. The state's biennial legislative session concluded earlier this month. ___ Associated Press reporter John Hanna contributed from Topeka, Kansas.
Associated Press
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Associated Press
Ruling in North Dakota case erases path for people in 7 states to sue under the Voting Rights Act
BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) — A federal appeals court that already has said private individuals and groups cannot sue under a key part of the federal Voting Rights Act went even further Wednesday toward blocking lawsuits over alleged racial bias in voting in seven Midwest states. But its decisions may not be the last word, because another appeals court has ruled differently, and the U.S. Supreme Court would have to resolve the conflict. The latest ruling reversed a legal victory for two tribal nations in North Dakota that challenged a legislative redistricting plan. The ruling shuts off a route to Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act through a federal civil rights law known as Section 1983, which allows people to sue state officials to vindicate their federal or constitutional rights, said Jonathan Topaz, staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union Voting Rights Project. Section 1983 provides a legal vehicle to bring a lawsuit, he said. Private individuals in past decades brought lawsuits under Section 2, but a 2023 8th Circuit ruling in an Arkansas redistricting case held that Section 2 doesn't allow for private claims. That ruling and Wednesday's only apply to the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which encompasses Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota. 'These decisions together at the moment mean that no one can sue under the Voting Rights Act in the seven states that comprise the 8th Circuit, other than the U.S. Attorney General,' said Mark Gaber, senior director for redistricting at Campaign Legal Center and an attorney for the Spirit Lake Tribe and Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians. The majority opinion Wednesday said that in order to use Section 1983 to file lawsuits over voting rights, including how redistricting affects them, a private person or group must 'unambiguously' have the right to sue under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Appeals Judge Raymond Gruender, appointed by George W. Bush and writing for the majority, said that while the tribes 'are within the general zone of interest' of the Voting Rights Act, it is 'without the statute having unambiguously conferred an individual right.' In a dissent, Circuit Chief Judge Steven Colloton, another Bush appointee, said Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act does confer a right to sue and he would have upheld the tribes' legal victory on redistricting. Wednesday's decision and the Arkansas ruling 'create circuit splits' on the Section 2 and Section 1983 issues because the 8th Circuit is the only court to rule in such a way in both instances, Gaber said. The tribes and their attorneys are discussing and considering appeal options, he said. The 2-1 ruling is a reversal for the two tribes, who had successfully challenged North Dakota's 2021 redistricting map, alleging it dilutes their voting strength. The tribes wanted to share a single legislative district, electing a state senator and two House members, making it more likely that all three would be Native American. The 2021 plan split them into different districts. The court-ordered plan gave the tribes what they wanted. Spirit Lake, Turtle Mountain and several tribal citizens alleged that the 2021 map drew the lines so that while Turtle Mountain members still could elect a House member, the Spirit Lake members could not. In late 2023, U.S. District Court Chief Judge Peter Welte ruled after a trial, saying the Legislature's map 'prevents Native American voters from having an equal opportunity to elect candidates of their choice' in violation of the Voting Rights Act's Section 2. In early 2024, the judge ordered a new map into place with a joint district for the two tribes. Their reservations near the Canadian border and in northeastern North Dakota, respectively, are about 60 miles (97 kilometers) apart. Later that year, voters elected three Native Americans, all Democrats, to the district's seats. Republican Senate Majority Leader David Hogue said the 2021 boundaries the Legislature drew 'will be the boundaries.' Somehow officials will have to address the seats of incumbents affected by the boundaries at question, potentially by special election, he said. 'I think the Legislature was very comfortable with the fairness of the boundaries that they drew in 2021, and I think we should endeavor to uphold those boundaries,' Hogue said. In a statement, Secretary of State Michael Howe's office said it will now work with the 2021 map in place for the 2026 elections, 'pending any further actions.' Republicans control North Dakota's Legislature by 83-11 in the House and 42-5 in the Senate. The state's biennial legislative session concluded earlier this month. ___ Associated Press reporter John Hanna contributed from Topeka, Kansas.
